Posts by hooberus

537

evolution or creation? lets talk...

by Sam87 in

jw
friends

ok, lets have a discussion about where we all came from, evolution or creation?

(or whatever you beleive in of course) every one put down there main reasons, along with reasonable facts and backup as to why.. .

hopefully this doesnt start to many arguments, lol.. .

hooberus

Was wondering when hooberus was going to show up!
As for AiG, when a website specifically states that it has as an article of faith:
No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.
then it loses any credibility. You conveniently overlooked that part. When the evidence (fossils, DNA, etc.) overwhelmingly points at an evolutionary progression to what we see around us today, AiG must categorically refuse to even consider such evidence since it contradicts the very purpose of the website.

My previous comments were clearly dealing specifically with the issue of peer-review, and not as a total response to everything that you posted.

Regarding the AiG statement that "No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record", interested persons can see the following on this also from them:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/feedback/negative_25March2002.asp

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v11/i1/rules.asp

Anyway, talkorigins (which you have used) is (in addition to not being peer-reviewed) itself heavily biased. You find statemets such as:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA301_1.html

"We cannot observe the supernatural, so the only way we could reach the supernatural explanation would be to eliminate all natural explanations. But we can never know that we have eliminated all possibilities. Even if a supernatural explanation is correct, we can never reach it."

"If we do miss a supernatural explanation, so what? Supernatural explanations cannot be generalized, so the explanation does not matter anywhere else. The usefulness of science comes from the ability to apply findings to different areas. Any supernatural explanation would be useless."

537

evolution or creation? lets talk...

by Sam87 in

jw
friends

ok, lets have a discussion about where we all came from, evolution or creation?

(or whatever you beleive in of course) every one put down there main reasons, along with reasonable facts and backup as to why.. .

hopefully this doesnt start to many arguments, lol.. .

hooberus

TopHat, copy-pasting an url from Answers in Genesis only proves you don't understand evolution nor do you understand science. AiG is not a peer-reviewed, scientific website.

acsot, even one of your own sources (talkorigins) says: "Visitors to the archive should be aware that essays and FAQs appearing in the archive have generally not undergone a rigorous peer review procedure by scientific experts. Rather, they have been commented on and critiqued by the readership of the talk.origins newsgroup."

Anyway, persons desiring a peer-reviewed informed creationist scientific perspective can see the following:

http://www.creationresearch.org

http://www.csfpittsburgh.org/icc.htm

http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_papers

http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/24/68/

13

The farce called Christianity

by sinis in

jesus as a mythical copycat.

- by acharya s .

- his father is god and his mother is a mortal virgin.

hooberus

The real "farce" is the pagan copy-cat claim. Even secularists have come out against many such claims (for example see the section on "Dying and Rising Gods" in the Encyclopedia of Religion). Also look up the sections on the individual pagan gods (eg. Horus, Oriris, Attis) in encyclopedias, and you not find many of the so-called parallels. The copy-cat claims tend to rely on: 1 Post-christian sources (eg. the use of a thrid century crucified "Orpheus Bacchus" amulet) ; 2. Terminological equivocation (eg. being shot in the foot by a hunters arrow being labeled as "crucifixion); 3. Unjust dismissal of legitimate historical sources 4. Fallacy of false cause; 5. Poorly documented (or completely undocumented claims).

http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html

http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/crj0169a.txt

http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3013/

537

evolution or creation? lets talk...

by Sam87 in

jw
friends

ok, lets have a discussion about where we all came from, evolution or creation?

(or whatever you beleive in of course) every one put down there main reasons, along with reasonable facts and backup as to why.. .

hopefully this doesnt start to many arguments, lol.. .

hooberus

Persons desiring an informed creationist scientific perspective will find the following links helpful:

http://www.creationresearch.org

http://www.csfpittsburgh.org/icc.htm

http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_papers

http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/24/68/

For responses to many of the claims by evolutionists here see my post history.

39

A Case FOR Evolution?

by pmouse in

.

and the official wts response?

new light, silence, imperfect man or imperfect bird?.

hooberus

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/cfol/ch2-selection.asp

60

The Evolution of Judas Iscariot

by Leolaia in

the story of judas iscariot in the gospels provides the reader with a fascinating picture of how the plot and details of the narratives were gleaned from the ot and embellished in different ways.

the evangelists and the tradents that preceded them looked to the ot (and other affiliated literature) for information on what happened to jesus, employing a haggadaic method of biblical interpretation similar to how rabbis and authors of pseudepigraphs in the second temple era expanded the brief stories of the patriarchs in genesis with reams of new detail and legendary episodes -- through the means of exegesis aimed to penetrate beyond a plain reading of the text to "fill in the blanks" of what must have happened.

the authors of the gospels also scoured through the ot to discover what was supposed to happen to jesus and wrote their stories accordingly.

hooberus

Threads like this (with the implication that the gospel accounts contain fiction/fraud) are simply too long for the relatively few believers (in the historicity of the Biblical accounts) that post here to at all reasonably respond to. In my opinion such lengthy "scholarly type" threads (almost always from a liberal prespective and presuppostional framework) would reallly be better posted (if opposing discussion/debate is desired) on more dedicated forums (theology web?) -wherein such material would be much more likely to be responded to by conservatives who have the time and background for such discussions. It may also be helpful on threads like this if any modern book sources for arguments being used (if any) were also listed.

That said the following offers some points regarding similar type arguments by others:

http://www.tektonics.org/gk/helmsr01.html

52

What happened between Jesus death & the gospels being written?

by yaddayadda in

hi, i'm interested in researching this subject.

can anyone recommend any good books that offer critical theories on the origins of early christianity, specifically the content and creation of the gospels.

for instance, how much of the gospels is underlying historical truth and how much might be exaggerations that crept in through, say 'chinese whispers' in the time between jesus death and the writing of the gospels ?

hooberus

There are also numerous resources and books from the conservative position as well.

http://www.tektonics.org/qm/qmhub.html

http://www.christian-thinktank.com

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/stil0108.html

44

The Global Flood and Antarctica - Can we have both?

by mavie in

jw
friends

a thought came to me this morning in the shower.

i was thinking about ice cores scientists have drilled in antarctica from which they can measure conditions that existed 650,000 years ago.

this got me thinking, how could antarctica have been around that long if the global flood as described in genesis really happened?

hooberus

Antyone who is truely interested in ice core and other chronological issue data from a biblical prespective may wish to consult the following (I no longer participate in origins discussions here):

http://www.csfpittsburgh.org/icc.htm

http://www.creationresearch.org/

http://www.icr.org/

http://www.answersingenesis.org

Books and arcticles by Michael Oard may be especially helpful on the ice core issue.

64

Do we have non-Biblical evidence that Jesus Christ existed?

by Inquisitor in

what non-biblical, historical evidence proves or supports the notion that jesus once existed as a living, breathing jewish man?

i'll start with the one that i used to swear by back when i was a good jw.

the roman historian suetonius (c. 69-140 c.e.

hooberus

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcno.htm

See the following regarding the claims in the "religious tolerance" arcticle about Mithras and Christianity.

http://tektonics.org/copycat/mithra.html

64

Do we have non-Biblical evidence that Jesus Christ existed?

by Inquisitor in

what non-biblical, historical evidence proves or supports the notion that jesus once existed as a living, breathing jewish man?

i'll start with the one that i used to swear by back when i was a good jw.

the roman historian suetonius (c. 69-140 c.e.

hooberus

As far as I know only a small minority of historians believe that Jesus never existed at all, most agree that He did exist though many of these doubt the crucifixion story calling it crucifiction.

I think that you will find that most historians do not doubt the crucifixion. For example the Encyclopedia Brittanica Micropaedia Vol. 3 p.762 states (with no qualifications): "in about AD 32 Pontius Pilate had Jesus of Nazareth put to death by crucifixion." see also my previous link on this thread for several ancient references to the crucifixion.